Influence of brand management on rivalry for consumers in the mobile telecommunication industry

European Journal of Business and Management www.iiste.org

ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2839 (Online)

Vol.5, No.15, 2013

83

Influence of Brand Management on Rivalry for Consumers in the

Mobile Telecommunication Industry

W. K. Kiberen1*, D.Musiega

2, S. Juma

3

School of Human Resource, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology

P.O. Box 41 code 30200 Kitale Kenya

Telephone +254713352111, Email: *[email protected]

Abstract

Business companies in the world today regardless of the industry invest in Brand management in order to win

consumer loyalty to their brands. This way the companies become relevant in business by increasing their market

share and revenue in form of profits. The purpose of the study was to establish the Influence of Brand

Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry. The objectives of the study were: - to

establish factors that affect consumers purchasing behavior and find out how the consumers benefit from the

rivalry. The research designs used was descriptive survey designs. The target population consisted of 289,380

inhabitants of Eldoret municipality. The study sample consisted of 399 inhabitants of Eldoret Municipality who

were selected using simple random sampling technique. From the research findings, the study established that

there is rivalry between the mobile telecommunication providers on major brands including internet connectivity,

mobile money transfer, short message service and voice call services. Consumers benefit as a result of reduced

product prices, quality services, and fast internet connections. Several factors that affected purchasing behavior

were income and employment levels. The study concluded that employment and income were the main factors

that motivate and affect the purchasing behavior of consumers. The study also concluded that consumers benefit

from rivalry resulting from good brand management by mobile telecommunication operators.

Key words: purchasing behavior, brand management, rivalry, telecommunication industry, Eldoret

Background

Business industries today strive to become more competitive, by creating flexible strategies that give them a

competitive advantage over their competitors. Globally, brand management has become a core feature in the

market. Many companies have invested heavily on it due to the need to win consumer loyalty to brands. This has

become significant to companies in their efforts to increase their market share and making of profit. “Until you

know exactly which brands you need to win against for a greater share of the consumer’s attention, you won’t

know how best to improve your strategic brand positioning. You won’t know whether your brands really matter

to consumers or not. The producer identifies where the brand sits on the competitive market and the type of

brands and products it truly competes against. Most marketers feel they have a pretty good idea of the brands

they compete against, but often that Competitive frame is either defined too narrowly or too broadly.” Eric

Greifenberger, (2009): Brand management is the application of marketing techniques on a specific product,

product line or a brand. It includes managing the tangible and intangible characteristics of brand. In case of

product brands, the tangibles include the product itself, price, packaging, etc. While in case of service brands, the

tangibles include the customers’ experience. The intangibles include emotional connections with the product /

service (management study guide, 2012) It is necessary for companies to manage their brands and build brand

equity over time. This is where the benefits of brand management are realized. Brand management helps in

building a company’s image. A successful brand can only be created if the brand management system of a

company is competent.

Mobile telecommunication operators and service providers have reasons to invest on brand management mainly

to differentiate, control and maintain their market share, offer the best service and products at competitive prices,

provide cost leadership, and finally gain competitive advantage. The rivalry in the industry should bring benefits

to the consumers. What is not explicit therefore is whether these benefits are truly realized by consumers as they

exercise their power to purchase telecommunication products and services. This study therefore is intended to

find out if consumers benefit from rivalry in the industry.

The purpose of the study therefore was to establish the Influence of Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry. The objectives of the study were: - to establish factors that affect consumers

purchasing behavior and find out how the consumers benefit from the rivalry.

2.1 Telecommunication industry in Kenya

“Historically, mobile telephones were first introduced in the Kenyan market in 1992, but the real diffusion of this

technology and of affordable services started in 1999 when the Communications Commission of Kenya (CCK)

was established and the newly privatized companies, Safaricom and Airtel Kenya (previously known as Ken Cell,

Celtel and Zain Communications) were licensed by CCK to provide mobile services. These two operators,

European Journal of Business and Management


Vol.5, No.15, 2013

currently providing mobile connectivity in Kenya, have covered gradually t

and they are still continuing in this trend of growth.”

Currently, Kenya is ranked as one among the most advanced countries in the field of telecommunication industry

in Africa. Literature indicates that by the end of 2007, Kenyan mobile operators had offered services to more

than ten million people. By the year 2012, it was estimated that more than 80% of Kenyans were covered by

mobile network signals. The network is still growing a

even more remote areas of the country,

In one year, from 2006 to 2007, the cellular mobile services recorded an increase in the number of channels

installed in GSM base station transmitt

to the increased subscriber base, requiring mobile operators to increase investment in network expansion.

2.2 A brief profile of mobile telephone operators in Kenya

Safaricom, Ltd is a leading mobile network

subsidiary of Telkom Kenya. In May 2000,

and management responsibility for the company. Safaricom employs over 1500 people mainly stationed in

Nairobi and other big cities like Mombasa

Currently, it has nationwide dealerships to ensure customers across the country have access to its products and

services. As of December 2012, Safaricom subscriber base was approximately 19.8 million, most of who are in

the major cities - Nairobi, Mombasa, K

Waiyaki Way in Westlands, Nairobi. Its main services and pr

message services, mobile banking services, internet services among others. Its main rival is

rivals include Essar's YU and Orang

Airtel Kenya ltd was launched in Kenya in 2000 as Kencell and rebranded to Zain in 2008 and finally Airtel in

2010. The company boasts of being Kenya's most innovative mobile phone operator. The company offers a host

of services which include; Airtel Money, prepaid & Post paid plans, network connectivity, international roaming,

and sms internet access. Airtel Kenya has seen itself grow tremendously from net work connectivity and quality

of services despite continuous rebranding.

2012. (CCK, 2012)

Telkom Kenya was established as a telecommunications operator under the Companies Act in April 1999. The

company provides integrated communications solutions in Kenya with the

services, fixed lines, mobile technology and internet

Telkom Kenya's partnership with France Telecom Group saw the launch of the Orange brand in Kenya in 2008.

Orange Telkom had a subscriber base of over 3.2 million subscribers by December 2012 according to the (CCK,

2012) quarterly report.

Essar Telecom Kenya is Kenya’s fourth mobile cellular network under the brand

December, 2008. yuMobile grew its

months from the date of its launch., the network had a subscriber base of over 2.4 million by December

2012 .yuMobile offers several innovative product and service offerings all target

easier and more convenient. The services include; yu cash, internet services, SMS services, and voice call

services among others.

2.3 The genesis of mobile telephones in telecommunication industry in Africa

The 1st mode of telecommunication in Kenya greatly depended on cables laid on the Indian Ocean which linked

Zanzibar, Mombasa and Dar es Salaam. The cables were laid by the eastern and South African telegraph

company in 1888. Internally, the telegraph network was extend

expansion started. This was even due to the construction of the railway line. It reached Nairobi in 1898. In 1908,

public telephone network began servicing Nairobi and its environs. By 1980, there were 73,932 s

Tyler and Jonscher, (1982): KP&TC Annual Reports.

The use of mobile telephones has become the most important mode of telecommunications in the world.

Developing Countries haven’t been left behind, including Africa. “For a large part of the popu

telephone results an “affordable” friendly technology, while Internet access is a reality for many businesses and

public institutions, but it is still an expensive technology restricted to individuals with higher levels of education

and incomes.”Luca Manica and Michele Vescovi, (2008)

European Journal of Business and Management

2839 (Online)

84

currently providing mobile connectivity in Kenya, have covered gradually the majority of the populated areas,

and they are still continuing in this trend of growth.”Luca Manica and Michele Vescovi, (2008)


erature indicates that by the end of 2007, Kenyan mobile operators had offered services to more


mobile network signals. The network is still growing and mobile operators are extending their coverage reaching

even more remote areas of the country, CCK, (2010)


installed in GSM base station transmitters, from about 15,000 to about 20,000. This increase could be attributed


2.2 A brief profile of mobile telephone operators in Kenya

mobile network operator in Kenya. It was formed in 1997 as a fully owned

. In May 2000, Vodafone group Plc of the United Kingdom


Mombasa, Kisumu, Nakuru and Eldoret in which it manages retail outlets.

rrently, it has nationwide dealerships to ensure customers across the country have access to its products and


Nairobi, Mombasa, Kisumu and Nakuru. Its headquarters are located in Safaricom House,

, Nairobi. Its main services and products include: Voice calling services, short

message services, mobile banking services, internet services among others. Its main rival is

Orange Wireless (CCK, 2012).

was launched in Kenya in 2000 as Kencell and rebranded to Zain in 2008 and finally Airtel in


ch include; Airtel Money, prepaid & Post paid plans, network connectivity, international roaming,


of services despite continuous rebranding. Airtel Kenya had a subscriber base of over 5.2 million by December

established as a telecommunications operator under the Companies Act in April 1999. The

company provides integrated communications solutions in Kenya with the widest range of voice and data

fixed lines, mobile technology and internet facilities for residential and business customers.


m had a subscriber base of over 3.2 million subscribers by December 2012 according to the (CCK,

is Kenya’s fourth mobile cellular network under the brand “yuMobile

December, 2008. yuMobile grew its network coverage in Kenya fast and boasts of this achievement within 10


2012 .yuMobile offers several innovative product and service offerings all targeted at making the subscribers life


2.3 The genesis of mobile telephones in telecommunication industry in Africa

f telecommunication in Kenya greatly depended on cables laid on the Indian Ocean which linked


company in 1888. Internally, the telegraph network was extended to Lamu. It was not until 1896 when inland


public telephone network began servicing Nairobi and its environs. By 1980, there were 73,932 s

Tyler and Jonscher, (1982): KP&TC Annual Reports.


Developing Countries haven’t been left behind, including Africa. “For a large part of the popu



Luca Manica and Michele Vescovi, (2008)

www.iiste.org

he majority of the populated areas,

Luca Manica and Michele Vescovi, (2008)


erature indicates that by the end of 2007, Kenyan mobile operators had offered services to more


nd mobile operators are extending their coverage reaching


ers, from about 15,000 to about 20,000. This increase could be attributed


. It was formed in 1997 as a fully owned

United Kingdom acquired a 40% stake


, Nakuru and Eldoret in which it manages retail outlets.

rrently, it has nationwide dealerships to ensure customers across the country have access to its products and


. Its headquarters are located in Safaricom House,

oducts include: Voice calling services, short

message services, mobile banking services, internet services among others. Its main rival is Airtel Kenya. Other

was launched in Kenya in 2000 as Kencell and rebranded to Zain in 2008 and finally Airtel in


ch include; Airtel Money, prepaid & Post paid plans, network connectivity, international roaming,


el Kenya had a subscriber base of over 5.2 million by December

established as a telecommunications operator under the Companies Act in April 1999. The

widest range of voice and data

facilities for residential and business customers.


m had a subscriber base of over 3.2 million subscribers by December 2012 according to the (CCK,

“yuMobile”, launched in

network coverage in Kenya fast and boasts of this achievement within 10


ed at making the subscribers life


f telecommunication in Kenya greatly depended on cables laid on the Indian Ocean which linked


ed to Lamu. It was not until 1896 when inland


public telephone network began servicing Nairobi and its environs. By 1980, there were 73,932 subscribers;


Developing Countries haven’t been left behind, including Africa. “For a large part of the population mobile





Vol.5, No.15, 2013

85

In the last decades, the communication industry has witnessed a massive growth of the mobile telephones in

Africa. Nowadays, mobile phone has become the first communication technology having more users in

Developing Countries; in particular, looking at the mobile subscriber numbers, Africa is showing the highest

growth rate worldwide.”Luca Manica and Michele Vescovi, (2008) Reports indicate that by early 2008, the

number of mobile phone users in Africa had gone beyond 225 million, double the number registered in 2006,

almost ten times with respect to 2000 figures. In Kenya alone, the number of mobile subscriber had grown in 5

years from 2million to more than 9 million at the end of 2006. By the end of the year 2012 the subscriber levels

had grown tremendously to over 30 million in Kenya particularly among the four main mobile telephone

operators.

2.4 Brand management in business

“Branding is the giving of a name, term, sign, symbol or design, or a combination of these, that is intended to

identify the goods and services of one business or group of businesses and to differentiate them from those of

competitors” Bennett (1995).

The concept of brand management in Kenya is mainly as a strategic tool for firms to increase their market share,

and improve on profits. It also enhances clear product identity and customer loyalty. Investments in branding

awareness can be termed as powerful instruments of marketing strategy, as they are “important vehicles on the

road to long-term profitability”. De Pelsmacker (2001)35”

“Brand identity is a unique set of brand associations that the branding strategist intends to create and maintain.

These associations represent what the brand stands for and imply a promise to customers from the organization

members” Aaker (1999), 68”

The role of brand management is crucial and the strength in the brand formed has become a powerful marketing

tool. Critical point of the branding is the creation of brand identity. This starts with the name, logo, slogan,

colors, features, packaging and all other characteristics that will work as trademark for the brand.

Batchelor,(1998)stated that a brand can be an everlasting and lucrative asset as long as it is maintained in a good

manner that can continue satisfying consumers’ needs. Although successful brands can be totally different in

nature, they share something in common, for instance well-priced products and consistent quality Murphy,

(1998).

As the management, there are four elements for building a successful brand, namely tangible product, basic

brand, augmented brand and potential brand, Levitt, (1983).

Mercy A.B et al (2011) stated that a basic brand, on the other hand, considers the packaging of the tangible

product so as to attract the attention from the potential customers. The brand management can be further

augmented with the provision of credibility, effective after-sales services and the like. Finally and most

importantly, a potential brand is established through engendering customer preference and loyalty. By doing so,

the image of the brand could be well instilled in the customers’ mind. Brand loyalty is a core component of

brand equity. It positively and directly affects brand equity Atilgan et al., (2005). Brand equity indicates the way

a brand name increases value to a service. This value derives its worth from the perceptions of consumers which,

if positive, result in higher profits (Del Rio et al., 2001: 452; Felwick, 2002: 38–39). A company’s brand equity

takes time to be developed and is not easily transferrable other companies. Its value is shown in the company’s

high financial performance (Delgado-Ballester & Munueara-Aleman 2005:188).

2.5 Rivalry for consumers in the mobile telecommunication industry

The reason why firms engage in rivalry is to influence the customer’s purchasing behavior in their favor.

“Customer purchasing behavior is considered as an outcome of interaction between service companies and

customers. It is defined as the outcome of customers’ interactions with the firm, including the interaction with

the staff, self-service technologies, and the service environment. These interactions influence not only what they

think and feel about a brand but also the strength of their relationship with the brand.” Juthamard Sirapracha

and Gerard Tocquer, (2012)

Competition in the mobile telecommunication industry is at times very intense and dynamic. The management of

brands and products by competing firms need to be carefully thought and understood. In this sort of rivalry firms

use existing owned resources, develop further needed resources in a fast manner to outdo competitors. The aim is

to capture the customers of their rivals, develop potential customers as well as competing for sales to shared

customers. This is why successful firms have to engage in efforts to capture the true dynamics of competitive

rivalry such as extending micro-economics approaches (Porter 1991), developing of competence-based concepts

(Prahalad and Hamel 1990) and use of scenario-planning methods (Wack 1985, schoemaker 1995).

Efforts by firms to copy sustain or even buy resources without much interference from actual or potential rivals

may succeed but developing them or capturing them from others definitely brings firms into conflict with

competitors (Gant 1991, Peteraf 1993). However there are situations in competition where collaboration between

competitors may be beneficial for instance Western companies are strong in distribution channels and product

technology which have been exploited by the Japanese joint venture partners while Japanese Manufacturing



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

86

excellence and new product development capabilities have proved difficult for western companies to lean (Gary,

C. K. Prahalad 1989).

In order for firms to sustain competitive advantage they must constantly develop their resource base by

continually innovating and shifting the basis of the competitive advantage from basic to advanced factors of

production (Michael E. Porter, 1990).Michael Porter (1996) argued that there are five competitive forces which

operates in an industry and together determine the potential profitability of that industry. These forces are very

applicable even in the Telecommunication industry and include;The entry of new competitors, The Threat from

Substitutes, The Bargaining Power of Customers, Rivalry among Existing Competitor, The Bargaining Power of

Suppliers Several products were examined in this study as being the major ones in which operators undertake

branding to gain competitive advantage over each other they include: Money transfer and banking services,

Internet connectivity and speed, Voice call rates and SMS services

3.0 Methodology This study used the descriptive survey research design. The study Population consisted of the whole of the

residents of Eldoret municipality from whom information could be gathered. It was estimated according to the

2009 national population census that the municipality had a population of 289,380(census, 2009) inhabitants.

The target population consisted of all people within Eldoret municipality particularly those who owned or

utilized mobile telephones especially within Central Business District. This population target was chosen

because they were relevant to the research study undertaken.

The Mugenda (2003) formula was used in determining the research sample size.

The formula is stated as follows:

n= N ⁄1+N (e) 2 where

n= sample size

N=study population

e= coefficient, 0.05

Using the above formula

N=289,380……….but 72% are the youth targeted group, (census, 2009)

Therefore, N= 289,380 × 72%

=208,354

n = 208,354/1+208,354(0.05)2 = 399

The sampling technique used was non-probability sampling. One of the key reasons why non-probability

sampling was used is because there was no lists of mobile phone users, particularly the prepaid market

especially provided for the Eldoret town. Convenience sampling was used. This method helped in obtaining

elements which were most conveniently available within the shopping malls, complexes and Jua Kali. It was

economical since there was not a high budget allocated to the researcher. This method was also used because

there was a large number of questionnaires to be completed in this case.

The research study adopted questionnaire as the research instrument. A pretested and approved interview

schedule/questionnaire was used to interview respondents. The design of the questionnaire borrowed guidelines

such as specifying required information, determining the questionnaire type and mode of administering it,

developing the contents of individual questions, deciding on the format of the questions and form of response,

phrasing of questions and the sequencing of the questions (Widd & Diggines, 2009: 172-181)

Clarification of specific information needed was made based on the objectives of the study. The questionnaire

was structured and self-administered and a cover letter was attached to each in order to assure confidentiality of

the research and willingness of the respondents to participate. The questionnaire contained closed-ended

questions, giving the respondents a limited response. In some questions respondents were given two choices with

one possible response. The design of the questions was such that it avoided complexity, leading, ambiguity,

assumption and burdensomeness. They were also structured in a simple way to ease answering and consume less

time. The most general questions were asked first and sensitive ones came in last to avoid biasness in responses.

Research authority was obtained from Jomo Kenyatta University research department and the Eldoret Municipal

administration. Before the interview and data collection, consent and assent was obtained from the respondent

and he/she was assured of confidentiality of the information given. Data collection was done using identified

university students in their final year of study. They were asked to attend a training session for the task. During

the session, they were taken through how to administer the questionnaire and best way to approach the

respondents. The data collection followed a number of steps (cant et al., 2003: 137-140), which included the

following; Selecting of the field research assistants, training of the assistants, supervision of the field assistants,

validation of the field work and the evaluation of the field assistants.

Pre-testing of the questionnaire was undertaken to ensure that it was of the appropriate length, it was also done to

ensure clarity and flow of the questions. The questionnaire was pre-tested with a potential group of 30 responses.



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

87

The results of the pre-testing led to some adjustments to the questionnaire.

Data was analyzed and then presented in the form of graphs, charts, tables. Three types of analyses were

performed on the study variables these were frequency analysis, Pearson’s correlation analysis and regression

analysis.

4.0 Results

The purpose of the study was to establish the Influence of Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry. The research question responded to was: which factors affect consumers

purchasing behavior and how do the consumers benefit from the rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication

Industry? Various factors affecting consumer behavior and how the consumers benefit from the rivalry in the

Mobile Telecommunication Industry were identified. The factors include the sex, age, education level and

income level of respondents. Table 1, 2, 3 and 4 indicates sex, age, education level and income level of

respondents and Pearson product moment correlation coefficient on the relationship between the consumer

behavior and Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry

Table 1: The characteristics of respondent (n=399)

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

The sex of the respondent

Male 255 63.9 63.9

Female 144 36.1 100.0

Total 399 100.0

Age of the respondents

19yrs & Below 46 11.5 11.5

20-29yrs 270 67.7 79.2

30-39yrs 71 17.8 97.0

40yrs & Above 12 3.0 100.0

Total 399 100.0

Education level of respondent

None 5 1.3 1.3

Primary 6 1.5 2.8

Secondary 68 17.0 19.8

Tertiary 320 80.2 100.0

Total 399 100.0

Income level of the respondent

Nil 177 44.4 44.4

Low(10,000 & Below 109 27.3 71.7

Medium(10,001-

50,000) 111 27.8 99.5

High(50,000 &

Above) 2 .5 100.0

Total 399 100.0

From table 1 the study shows that 255(63.9%) respondents were male and 144(36.1%) respondents were female.

The respondents’ age bracket varied from 19yrs & below to 40yrs & above. 19yrs & below were 46(11.5%), 20-

29yrs were 270(67.7%), 30-39yrs were 71(17.8%) and 40yrs & above were 12(3.0%).The respondent’ level of

education varied from non-formal to tertiary. Those with non-formal were 5(1.3%), primary education 6(1.5%),

secondary 68(17.0%) and tertiary education 320(80.2%). the study also shows that 177 (44.4%) respondent had

no income; 109(27.3%) respondent had income of Kshs. 10,001 and below; 111(27.8%) respondent had no

income between Kshs.10, 001.00 to Kshs.50, 000.00;2 (0.5%) respondents had income Kshs. 50,000 & above.



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

88

Table 2: The mobile phones, branding and rivalry (n=399)

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

Own a mobile phone

YES 390 97.7 97.7

NO 9 2.3 100.0

Considerations while purchasing a cellphone

PRICE 39 9.8 9.8

APPLICATIONS 280 70.2 79.9

DURABILITY 13 3.3 83.2

OTHERS 67 16.8 100.0

understand branding

YES 375 94.0 94.0

NO 24 6.0 100.0

Total 399 100.0

branding & choice of a mobile phone service provider

YES 360 90.2 90.2

NO 39 9.8 100.0

branding products purchasing behaviour

INTERNET 250 62.7 62.7

VOICE TARIFFS 74 18.5 81.2

SMS SERVICES 1 .3 81.5

MONEY TRANSFER 27 6.8 88.2

OTHERS 47 11.8 100.0

factors affect your choice of a mobile

PRICING 36 9.0 9.0

NETWORK

CONNECTIVITY 274 68.7 77.7

PRODUCT DIVERSITY 48 12.0 89.7

OTHERS 41 10.3 100.0

Positive effect of rivalry in the mobile telecommunication industry

YES 344 86.2 86.2

NO 55 13.8 100.0

Total 399 100.0

From Table 2 the study established that 390(97.7%) respondents own mobile phones while 9(2.3%) do not. The

reasons taken into Considerations by respondents while purchasing a cellphone

were;price(39,9.8%),applications(280,70.2%),durability(13,3.3%),others(67,16.8%).The respondents were asked

if they understood what branding was;375 (94.0%) respondents said yes while 24(6.0%) said no. the study

further established whether branding in mobile telecommunication industry affect choice of a mobile phone

service provider. 360(90.2%) observed yes while 39(9.8%) observed no. the study further established what

branding products affect purchasing behaviour, the respondents observed that it was Internet (250,62.7%),

Voice Tariffs (74, 18.5%), Sms Services (1, 0.3%) , Money Transfer (27, 6.8%) and Others(47, 11.8%). The

study also established branding factors that affect the choice of a mobile: the respondents observed that it was

pricing;(36,9%),network connectivity(274,68.7%),product diversity(48,12%) and others(41,10.3%). The study

established how the rivalry in the mobile telecommunication industry affects respondents positively. The

observations made show that344 (86.2%) indicated Yes while 55(13.8%) indicated No.

To establish the Influence of Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry Pearson

product moment correlation coefficient was calculated and results were as shown in Table 3 and 4



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

89

Table 3: Correlation Matrix on factors influencing Branding & Choice (n=400)

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6

The Sex Of The Respondent X1 Pearson Correlation 1

Sig. (2-tailed)

Age Of The Respondents X2 Pearson Correlation .085 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .089

Education Level Of Respondents X3 Pearson Correlation .178

** .049 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .325

Employment Status Of Respondents X4 Pearson Correlation .088 .398

**

-

.131**

1

Sig. (2-tailed) .080 .000 .009

Income Level Of The Respondent X5 Pearson Correlation .089 .575

** -.048 .886

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .077 .000 .335 .000

Branding & Choice X6 Pearson Correlation .210

** .016 .020 .182

** .170

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .747 .687 .000 .001

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4: Correlation Matrix on factors influencing Branding & Rivalry

X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7

Own A Mobile Phone X1 Pearson Correlation 1

Sig. (2-tailed)

Consideration While Purchasing A

Cellphone X2

Pearson Correlation -.048 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .337

Understand Branding X3 Pearson Correlation -.038 .093 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .444 .064

Branding In MTI Affect Choice Of A

Mobile Phone Service Provider X4

Pearson Correlation -.050 .113* .165

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .319 .024 .001

Branding Products Affect Purchasing

Behaviour X5

Pearson Correlation .233**

.376**

.108* .498

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .031 .000

Branding Factors THAT Affect

Choice Of A Mobile X6

Pearson Correlation -.048 .299**

.243**

.424**

.575**

1

Sig. (2-tailed) .343 .000 .000 .000 .000

Rivalry In The MTI Is Positive. X7 Pearson Correlation .380

** -.076 .113

* .040 .075 .223

** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .131 .024 .428 .133 .000

Mobile Telecommunication Industry (MTI) 1

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Table 3 and Table 4 show Pearson correlation coefficient between the consumer behavior and Brand

Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry. This was the first step in establishing the

Influence of Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry. Multiple regression

analysis was computed so as to determine the inter correlation among the variables. In determining the multiple

regression analysis; it is necessary to first determine Coefficient of determination and the regression analysis of

variance. The findings are presented in Tables 6, 7 and 8.



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

90

Table 6:

Coefficient of determination of respondents factors against Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry.

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .283a .080 .068 .28703

a. Predictors: (Constant), Income level of the respondent, education level of respondent, the sex of the

respondent, Age of the respondents, employment status of respondent

a. Predictors: (Constant), what branding factors affect your choice of a mobile?, do you have a mobile phone?,

do you understand branding?, what do you consider while purchasing a cellphone, does branding in mobile

telecommunication industry affect choice of a mobile phone service provider?

From Table 6 the coefficient of determination is 0.080. It shows that 8.0 % of variation in Brand Management on

Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry is accounted for by the respondents’ characteristics. Analysis

of Variance was done to establish the level of significance as indicated in Table 7.

Table 7: Analysis of Variance of respondents’ factors with Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 2.809 5 .562 6.819 .000b

Residual 32.379 393 .082

Total 35.188 398

a. Dependent Variable: does branding in mobile telecommunication industry affect choice of a mobile phone

service provider?

b. Predictors: (Constant), Income level of the respondent, education level of respondent, the sex of the

respondent, Age of the respondents, employment status of respondent

Table 8: Analysis of Variance of Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication

Industry

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1

Regression 10.871 5 2.174 23.378 .000b

Residual 36.548 393 .093

Total 47.419 398

a. Dependent Variable: does rivalry in the mobile telecommunication industry affect you positively?

b. Predictors: (Constant), what branding factors affect your choice of a mobile?, do you have a mobile phone?,

do you understand branding?, what do you consider while purchasing a cellphone, does branding in mobile

telecommunication industry affect choice of a mobile phone service provider?

From Table 7 and 8 the level of significance was 0.000 which was less than the set p-value of 0.05. This means

that

Brand Management is predictor of Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication .To confirm the influence of

Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication Industry multiple regression

Analysis was done and the results were as shown in Table 9 and 10.

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

1 .479a .229 .219 .30495



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

91

Table 9: Multiple Regression Analysis of consumer behavior and Brand Management on Rivalry in the

Mobile Telecommunication Industry

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) .893 .116 7.717 .000

the sex of the respondent x1 .122 .031 .198 3.994 .000

Age of the respondents x2 -.056 .029 -.120 -1.933 .054

education level of respondent x3 .005 .028 .009 .171 .864

employment status of respondent x4 .019 .027 .079 .708 .479

Income level of the respondent x5 .053 .043 .152 1.234 .218

a. Dependent Variable: does branding in mobile telecommunication industry affect choice of a mobile phone

service provider?

From Table 9, a multiple regression was calculated to predict Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry. The results were; Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry =0.893+0.122x1-0.056x2+0.005x3+0.019x4+0.053x5.

Table 10: Multiple Regression Analysis of Rivalry in the mobile telecommunication industry

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) .008 .142 .058 .954

Do you have a mobile phone? X1 .898 .103 .387 8.712 .000

What do you consider while purchasing a

cellphone X2 -.058 .019 -.144 -3.109 .002

Do you understand branding? X3 .117 .066 .081 1.760 .079

Does branding in MTI affect choice of a mobile

phone service provider? X4 -.071 .057 -.061 -1.246 .214

What branding factors affect your choice of a

mobile? X5 .133 .024 .291 5.612 .000

a. Dependent Variable: does rivalry in the mobile telecommunication industry affect you positively?

From Table 8, a multiple regression was calculated to predict Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry. The results were; Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry =0.008+0.898X1-0.058X2+0.117X3-0.071X4+0.133X5.

4.2 Discussion Sex of the respondent contributed positively to Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication

Industry (MTI). The rivalry in the MTI improved by 0.122 with sex of the respondents as was signified by 0.122.

In Table 3 it can be established that there was a weak positive correlation of 0.210 that was significant between

the sex of the respondents and branding and choice. From table 1 majority of respondents were male (63.9%).

Also from Table 3 it can be established that there was a weak positive correlation of 0.182 that was significant

between the employment status of the respondents and branding and choice and further it was established that

there was a weak positive correlation of 0.170 that was significant between the income level of the respondents

and branding and choice. From table 1 majority of respondents (44.1%) were having nil income. However, most

respondents (44.1%) did not have any kind of employment. The self employed were 13.5%, those with casual

employment (20.1%) while formal employments were (22.1%). On the income level, majority of those employed

were either low or medium income earners as in the graph below. On the factors that the respondents considered

when purchasing a mobile phone, applications (70.18%) was the main determining factor while purchasing a

mobile phone. Consideration of price was (9.77%), and product durability was (3.25%) other unspecified factor

was (16.79%).majority of the respondents were aged between 20 and 29 years, with tertiary education (80.2%).

Owning a mobile phone contributed positively to Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile

Telecommunication Industry (MTI). The rivalry in the MTI improved by 0.898 with owning a mobile phone as

was signified by 0.898. In Table 3 it can be established that there was a moderate positive correlation of 0.380

that was significant between the owning mobile phone and rivalry in MTI. From table 2 majorities of

respondents owned mobile phones (97.7%).

Understanding branding contributed positively to Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

92

Telecommunication Industry (MTI). The rivalry in the MTI improved by 0.117 with Understanding branding as

was signified by 0.117. In Table 3 it can be established that there was a weak positive correlation of 0.113 that

was significant between the Understanding branding and rivalry in MTI. From table 2 majorities of respondents

Understanding branding (94.0%).

Branding factors contributed positively to Brand Management on Rivalry in the Mobile Telecommunication

Industry (MTI). The rivalry in the MTI improved by 0.133 with branding factors as was signified by 0.133. In

Table 4 it can be established that there was a weak positive correlation of 0.223 that was significant between

branding factors and rivalry in MTI. From table 2 network connectivity (68.67%) was the major factor affecting

the choice of a mobile service provider. On the analyses of products provided by the mobile telephone operator,

internet services (62.66%) dominated the branding products as the determining factor while purchasing, followed

by voice calls services (at 18.55%). Product diversity and pricing also were considered. Safaricom (75.13%) was

the most prefered mobile service provider compared to other competing companies

4.2.1 Brand management factors affecting consumer purchasing behavior

Employment status and the income level were found to have a positive correlation in the study. The two

variables, affected the purchasing behavior. The income level greatly determined the bargaining power of

consumers while purchasing a product. Therefore almost all the competing telecommunication operators targeted

the working class due to their high bargaining power. Those engaged in some form of employment whether

temporary, self-employment or formal employment earned income at different levels which enabled them to

make purchases as they afforded.

4.2.3 The impact of rivalry in the telecommunication industries in Kenya

Rivalry in the telecommunication industry indeed had significance on the purchasing behavior of the consumers.

This was witnessed by most consumers claiming that rivalry in the telecommunication industry influenced their

purchasing positively. Some went further by explaining that, competition in the voice tariffs lead to a decrease in

calling price which they enjoyed much. Some of the rivalry tools as explained by the consumers included

internet connectivity, Money transfer services and the voice tariff prices. The other contributing factor

considered in the rivalry was the network connectivity. Most consumers insisted that they selected their mobile

service provider based on the network connectivity.

Subscriber levels have been rising considerably at different levels for each of the mobile phone service providers

thus confirming that the rivalry by the providers have been on the rise and have affected consumers positively on

the basis of their brand management abilities. This is confirmed by figures as sourced from the Communication

Commission of Kenya by end of December 2012 quarterly report where Safaricom led with 19.8 million

subscribers representing 64.5%, followed by Airtel with 5.2 million representing 16.9%, the third was Essar’s

yuMobile with 3.2 million representing 10.5% and in the fourth place was Telkom Kenya with 2.5 million

representing 8.1%

5.0 Conclusion

Employment status, income level and the rivalry did have much significance in the study since indeed they

directly influenced the purchasing behavior of the customers. Therefore, the study concluded that brand

management is important in winning customers’ loyalty by positively influencing their purchasing behavior in

any industry. This is very significant to companies in increasing their market share, utilization of both tangible

and intangible resource as well as making of profit. Indeed the rivalry in the industry benefits consumers through

reduced prices, commissions, improved and fast communication and internet connectivity.

5.1 Recommendations

The study recommends first, that the mobile telecommunication companies should not only focus on the working

class but also the non-working. This is because, most people from the study (44%) were found to be

unemployed but they were the ones who embraced fruits of brand management in the field of mobile

telecommunication industry. This included products like price reductions in services, mobile banking, money

transfer and improved network connectivity. Secondly the study recommends that all companies focus on

improving or widening their Network connectivity in order to compete well in the rivalry market.

Acknowledgements

This study could not have succeeded without the immeasurable strength and grace granted to me by the Lord

Jesus Christ. I give him all glory and honour. To my beloved wife, Jane J Langat, thank you for your

understanding, support and encouragement throughout this endeavor. I am most grateful to my co-authors Dr

Douglas Musiega and Dr Juma Shem. I will always appreciate your contributions. Thank you for devoting your

time to this noble service. To my Pastor Benjamin Tarus, the church leadership and all members of the African

Inland Church Nuru, God bless you for your continued prayers and support.



Vol.5, No.15, 2013

93

References

Aaker, D.A. (1996), Building Strong Brands. The Free Press. New York.

Atilgan, E., Aksoy, S. and Akinci, S. 2005. Determinants of the brand equity: a verification approach in the

beverage industry in Turkey. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 23(3): 237–248.

Bennett, P.D. 1995, Dictionary of Marketing Terms. 2nd Edition

CCK, Annual Report 2006/2007.

CCK, 2012 Quarterly Report-December 2012

Darling, J. 2001. Successful competitive positioning: the key for entry into the European consumer market.

European Business Review, 13(4): 209–220.

Delgado-Ballester, E and Munueara-Alema, L. 2005. Does brand trust matter to brand equity? Journal of

Product and Brand Management, 14(3): 187–196.

De Pelsmacker, P., Geuens, M. & Van Den Bergh, J. 2001 Marketing Communications. Pearson Education

Limited. Essex (UK)

Del Rio, A., Vazquez, R. and Iglesias, V. 2001. The role of the brand name in obtaining differential advantages.

Journal of Product and Brand Management, 10(7): 452–465.

Eric Greifenberger, 2009, Henry Rak Consulting Partners

Felwick, P. 2002. World Advertising Research Center. United Kingdom: Oxfordshire.

Gary Hamel, Yves Doz, and C.K. Prahalad, Collaborate with Your Competitors-and Win. Harvard Business

Review ( January/February 1989) pp. 133-139

Grant, R. M (1991) A Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage: Implications for Strategy Formulation,

California Management Review33,3, 114-135

Keller, K. 2008. Strategic Brand Management: Building, Measuring, and ManagingBrand Equity. 3rd edition.

New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Kotler, P. and Armstrong, G. 2008. Principles of Marketing. 12th edition. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Luca Manica and Michele Vescovi, 2008, Mobile Telephony in Kenya

Martensen, A. 2007. Tweens‟ satisfaction and brand loyalty in the mobile phone market. Young Consumers,

8(2): 108–116.

Peteraf, M.A.(1993) The Cornerstones of Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based View, Strategic Managent

Journal, 14, 179-192

Myers, C. 2003. Managing brand equity: a look at the impact of attributes. Journal of Product and Brand

Management, 12(1): 39–51.

Porter, M.E. (1997), "How competitive forces shape strategy", Harvard business Review, March/April 1997

Porter, M.E. (1990), “Competitive Advantage of Nations”, Free Press, New York, 1990

Porter, M. E. (1991) Towards a Dynamic Theory of Strategy Managemen Journal, 12, 95-117

Porter, M.E. (1996), "What is Strategy", Harvard Business Review, Nov/Dec 1996

Prahalad, C. And Hamel G. (1990) The Core Competence of Organisation Havard Business Review 2, 75-83

Safaricom Prospectus. (http://www.acelinktrading.com/media/ipo/safaricomprospectus.pdf)

Schoemaker, P. (1995) A tool for Strategic Thinking Sloan Management Review 4, 25-40

Solomon, M. 2007. Consumer Behaviour: Buying, Having and Being. 8th edition. New Jersey: Pearson

Education.

Widd, J. and Diggines, C. (2009) Marketing Research. Cape Town: Juta.

Internet

http://www.Airtel.Co.ke

http://www.cck.go.ke/html/annual_reports.asp

http://www.safaricom.com

http://www.yu.co.ke

This academic article was published by The International Institute for Science,

Technology and Education (IISTE). The IISTE is a pioneer in the Open Access

Publishing service based in the U.S. and Europe. The aim of the institute is

Accelerating Global Knowledge Sharing.

More information about the publisher can be found in the IISTE’s homepage:

http://www.iiste.org

CALL FOR PAPERS

The IISTE is currently hosting more than 30 peer-reviewed academic journals and

collaborating with academic institutions around the world. There’s no deadline for

submission. Prospective authors of IISTE journals can find the submission

instruction on the following page: http://www.iiste.org/Journals/

The IISTE editorial team promises to the review and publish all the qualified

submissions in a fast manner. All the journals articles are available online to the

readers all over the world without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than

those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Printed version of the

journals is also available upon request of readers and authors.

IISTE Knowledge Sharing Partners

EBSCO, Index Copernicus, Ulrich's Periodicals Directory, JournalTOCS, PKP Open

Archives Harvester, Bielefeld Academic Search Engine, Elektronische

Zeitschriftenbibliothek EZB, Open J-Gate, OCLC WorldCat, Universe Digtial

Library , NewJour, Google Scholar

http://www.iiste.org/

http://www.iiste.org/Journals/

Influence of brand management on rivalry for consumers in the mobile telecommunication industry

Business

Transcript of Influence of brand management on rivalry for consumers in the mobile telecommunication industry